Field studies, qualifying topography

[^Atti Hekotik^]

Walking around various back-country landscapes, and sorting through some of the various community short-cuts, and tributaries that have been fledged in between various stages of architectural decay.

Obviously, I'm compelled to chart the grid-defying amolgamations. I'm always preferential to depicting the dominating composite graphic expression, of these intervening corridors, in stark relation to identifiable topographic anomolies.

Unfortunately, what this inadvertently fails to address, is a corresponding perspective priority.

I don't carry a bevel, or any prospecting scope around. I end up taking hyper-critical note of metallurgical 'hand-rules'; in order to, later on, stitch together the intricate correspondence of the edifiable geomorphic trajectories.

Roughly speaking; there are an enormous verse of topographical indicators, which can be procured by various older, pre-automated, traditional rubrics for [{what I typically refer to by^}] 'hand-rules'. A brief example, being; the use of the length of 'your arm, as a fairly known, constant, proportioned length.

I'm curious. Has anyone ever succeeded at configuring a very coherent, expansive likeness of an area, using any sort of older, traditional methodology's [{°I've been fascinated with 'dowsing, ever sense my grandfather had a new well dug, earlier in my youth}]

I could attempt to prompt more insights into the practice of observational, field topography analysis. I just thought I'd start with this, though; for now.


Atticus Heccotic'--

------+-+---------

{The file-sharing-path, needed to upload images, is proving to be painfully unresponsive}°
[{`I do hope to get a morsel of visual graphics, up on here, soon}]

[Hai-Etlik]

I think what you're trying to ask is "Has anyone here tried use pre-electronic surveying techniques to gather information for a map?" Is that correct?

If so I can't recall seeing anything like that in the guild. The closest I've come is gathering information for OpenStreetMap but that's done using smart phones or other GPS equipped devices. I think traditional surveying is too time consuming for an individual to gather a useful amount of information while also living a reasonably ordinary life.

I could see someone setting up a baseline and then triangulating a few points off of it. Maybe at most doing a further triangulation from a new line through one of the new points. If you can do that much, you could in principle keep going.

[Redrobes]

I have used a GPS to map an area and fill in the rest with guesswork but to do the baseline thing you really need a theodolite which not many people have.

[^Atti Hekotik^]

Effectively, yes. Your right. I'm digging for those archaic "principle discipline's", used for mapping techniques, when addressing an area 'at-a-glance'.

I've actually accomplished this sort of approach (by contrast from transferring consolidated data's, and statistical excerpts), with some success. I had drafted a rough depiction of the eastern ascent into the Rockies, from `I-80 through Wyoming; which I had been passing through, on a bus.

I had used an adaptation of perspective ~`hand-laws'; which consisted of cataloging the sequence of minuite changes in the posture of my hand; grasping chopsticks. The hypothetical rubric I used to orient the various postures of chopsticks, had been, formatively derived from the correspondence of the hand-rules for distinguishing 'Ohm's Law' (for inductance in coils), which I designated as a constant edifice for an over-arching perspective through that jut of the voyage. With this establishing basis (fundimentally, respective to the north, and the evident ground(downward)), I then reoriented the chopsticks, in reference to apparent, signature geological anomolies; redevising the relations between chopsticks, to retain the necessary proportions (within respect to the hand-rules for' Ohm's Laws).

The underlying theory, being that the proportional relations, used (loosely) to depict the apparent distance of geological anomolies, would fail to correlate with the evident presense, inadvertently, where the chopstick representation correlates to the contingency of the observable anomolies, when it was mitagated by the [{perspective constant}] referenced by ''Ohm's 'hand-laws°". Which left the absolute dimensions of the physical properties, constrained by the contiguity of the perspective constant.

~maybe, `sorta', like triangulation off a sight-line.~
~'sorta'~°

There was enough static, dependant variables, that I was able to draft a likeness; which, I'm fairly satisfied with (in the general sense).

Painfully, I'm having difficulties uploading images, here.

I'll try to get these study-sketches up, into this post; before the theoretical procedures, I used, become too misunderstood.

------Attok hekotik------

[Redrobes]

To post an image use the reply and hit the "Go advanced" button where there is a "manage attachments" option. You then select a file and upload it and it is embedded into the post as an attachment.

Using chopsticks is a pretty unusual method. I am amazed that it worked so well but if it does then kudos to you.